In today’s world, the global risk landscape is more interconnected and volatile than ever, driven by structural shifts in trade, geopolitics and policy. Boards that once operated in relatively stable environments now face ongoing uncertainty—making geostrategic risk oversight a core part of their role.
Research from EY-Parthenon shows a sharp rise in boards incorporating political and geopolitical risk into their strategic work. For example, 84% of boards now assess political risk impacts on strategy, up from 40% just a few years ago.
To stay ahead of disruption, boards should ask three critical questions:
-
Are we informed enough?
Boards are increasingly receiving political and macro risk briefings, both from internal teams and external experts. But quality matters: briefings should be forward-looking, concise, and presented in formats that encourage meaningful discussion. Boards that shift time from presentations to open dialogue get greater strategic value from these insights. -
Are our transactions and alliances geostrategically sound?
Risk considerations now influence M&A, partnerships and market entry decisions far more than in the past. Boards should challenge assumptions in deal strategies, examine geopolitical impacts on capital deployment, and use lessons from past transactions to strengthen future decision-making. -
Is our scenario planning robust?
Scenario planning remains one of the least practised yet most valuable tools for boards. Directors should ensure alignment on risk appetite, evaluate both downside threats and upside opportunities, and establish early-warning indicators that trigger strategic actions.
As geopolitical fragmentation collides with megatrends like technological change and demographic shifts, boards must integrate a global risk perspective into their oversight. Doing so helps boards not only hedge against threats but also identify strategic opportunities in an uncertain world